DINESH V BAHIRWANI, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-24(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 5853/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0507 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-09-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N HEMALATHA
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5853/M/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 MR. DINESH V. BAHIRWANI, UNIT NO.605, BUSINESS SUITES 9, PLOT NO.83, S.V. ROAD, SANTACRUZ (W), MUMBAI-400 054 PAN: ABRPB3559K VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER-24(1)(5), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SATYA PRAKASH SINGH, A.R. REVENUE BY : MS. N. HEMALATHA, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 08.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.01.2018 O R D E R PER D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.06.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] R ELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IS A PROPRIETOR OF FIRM M/S. SATYA TEX AND TRINITY TRADING ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING FABRICS AND TEXTILE MATERIA LS. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER (HEREI NAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO) DISALLOWED INTEREST PAID TO BANK ON ACCO UNT OF LOAN FACILITY AVAILABLE TO THE TUNE OF RS.6,40,827/-. ITA NO.5853/M/2017 MR. DINESH V. BAHIRWANI 2 3. MATTER CARRIED TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DISMISSED THE SAME. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE ME, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY IS COVERED BY THE DECISIO N OF TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN A.Y. 2012-13 WHEREIN THE TRI BUNAL HAS SET ASIDE THE ISSUE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 8. I HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE ALSO REQUIRES FRESH EXAMINATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF THE SUBMISSIONS MADE B Y LEARNED AR. ACCORDINGLY I SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THI S ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIREC TION TO EXAMINE THIS ISSUE AFRESH BY DULY CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS AND INFORMATIO N THAT MAY BE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ALSO BY CONS IDERING THE DECISION RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY THE AO MAY TAKE A PPROPRIATE DECISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW. 9. LAST ISSUE RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF Z 5,36,277 /- MADE OUT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE. LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE I S CONNECTED WITH THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S. 14A OF THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD ALREADY DISALLOWED A PART OF INTEREST E XPENDITURE AND HENCE HE WAS NOT RIGHT IN MAKING ADDITION U/S 36(1)(III) AGAIN. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS MADE IDENTICAL DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST EXP ENDITURE IN AY 2013-14 ONLY AS AN ALTERNATIVE ADDITION. IN VIEW OF THE SAI D SUBMISSIONS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE ALSO REQUIRES EXAMINATION AT T HE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER FOR EXAMINING IT AFRESH. 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME, I RESTORE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31.01.2018. SD/- (D.T. GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMB ER MUMBAI, DATED: 31.01.2018. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. ITA NO.5853/M/2017 MR. DINESH V. BAHIRWANI 3 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.